Hi-Fi Guys - 2.1 or 5.1

abt

BT
Aug 1, 2009
1,418
0
36
Sydney, Australia
I've never really been a fan of the whole surround thing. Having said that I've not really had that much exposure to it either.

I really want to get a decent Hi-Fi sytem. I've never had one. It will be in my living room. I'll be hooking it up to the TV home theater style, but for me, I really want it for listening to music.

I'm interested in a 5.1 system for movies but not at all for music. There seems to be a lot of debate about the whole 2.1 vs 5.1 vs 7.1 vs 19.4 (I made that last one up). I even read lately a push by purist that 2.0 is the way to go.

Thoughts?
 
Agree with Anssi, 2.0 for me, large floor standing speakers and a decent amplifier would be my preference for listening to music. I'd guess home cinema systems are designed for making explosions and sound effects sound awesome as much as they are for listening to music, so it depends if you want a jack of all trades, master of none type affair or just a really good system for music.
 
I'd also prefer a good stereo (2.0) setup for music. For movies and some games 5.1 is awesome, though.
If you want a quality product then you will get a much better setup with the same money for 2.0 than 5.1 obviously.
 
5.1, without a shadow of a doubt. It's more expensive, yes, but you can hook it up to play 2.0 when you're listening to normal CDs and you can music and movies in 5.1. If you setup your surround system properly(this is important, otherwise just get 2.0) and listen to a good surround mix 5.1 shits all over 2.0. Porcupine Tree - Fear Of A Blank Planet is a good example of this, the surround version makes stereo sound obsolete.
 
B36arin said:
5.1, without a shadow of a doubt. It's more expensive, yes, but you can hook it up to play 2.0 when you're listening to normal CDs and you can music and movies in 5.1. If you setup your surround system properly(this is important, otherwise just get 2.0) and listen to a good surround mix 5.1 shits all over 2.0. Porcupine Tree - Fear Of A Blank Planet is a good example of this, the surround version makes stereo sound obsolete.

I already pre-ordered the new Opeth and it comes with a 5.1 mix that I would love to listen to, I really want to get 5.1 for my living room, never experienced a 5.1 album.
 
the only thing that really blew me away in 5.1 for music is NIN - the downward spiral. so much goodness because of the millions of tracks and textures circling you. "with teeth" 5.1 isnt that good
 
I have a Z-2300 2.1. Sounds epic, I really like it for electronic music like dubstep and such for when I need extra bass WUWBUWBWUBWUBWUWBUWBBUB
 
5.1, but have a really nice front set of speakers for stereo listening. Ultimately you would want every speaker to be a really nice speaker, but if you listen to just stereo mostly then I would concentrate on the front pair first.

My system started out with JM Lab Electra's in the front, it was my biggest expenditure. Then I got a JM Lab lower series for all the other speakers. Slowly as money came in I would upgrade the other speakers and now I have Electra's all around and watching Terminator 2 just kicks fuckin' ass. I can watch the part with the Cyberdyne building a million times and still be amazed at the sound of the bullets and explosions moving the whole couch.
 
It's not worth paying for 4 extra speakers that you won't use most of the time, especially as you'll have to sacrifice the quality of the 2 speakers that you are using most of the time.

My mum owns a rather expensive home cinema system... which is fine for watching films, but has overbearing bass and a horrible boxy mid range thanks to tiny speakers and badly designed ported subwoofer. My dad's hi-fi cost the same (old school nad amp, big floor standing speakers) and completely destroys it for listening to music, every genre, every volume. Never listened to a surround mix before, but how many really are there? Not worth it IMO.
 
Surround speakers are typically designed for 2 things. Explosions (loads of bass) and and speech clarity (lots of high mids) and in my opinion tends to suck for listening to music. I'd go for a nice set of stereo speakers personally.
 
5.1, but have a really nice front set of speakers for stereo listening. Ultimately you would want every speaker to be a really nice speaker, but if you listen to just stereo mostly then I would concentrate on the front pair first.

My system started out with JM Lab Electra's in the front, it was my biggest expenditure. Then I got a JM Lab lower series for all the other speakers. Slowly as money came in I would upgrade the other speakers and now I have Electra's all around and watching Terminator 2 just kicks fuckin' ass. I can watch the part with the Cyberdyne building a million times and still be amazed at the sound of the bullets and explosions moving the whole couch.

Theses are pretty expensive if they're the one I think you're talking about. I like this idea the best, the best of both worlds. Isn't it a bit unbalance having good speakers in the front a cheaper ones in the rear? Obviously not in your case because they're all good but generally speaking?
 
Theses are pretty expensive if they're the one I think you're talking about. I like this idea the best, the best of both worlds. Isn't it a bit unbalance having good speakers in the front a cheaper ones in the rear? Obviously not in your case because they're all good but generally speaking?

Well it depends, some guys want all the speakers to be the same (THX style). All my speakers use the same drivers so they sound similar, although the front two have greater bass extension. Also a good receiver can calibrate your system so that the speakers match properly when in 5.1 mode. I had to slowly build up my system because I couldn't afford to buy everything I wanted at the beginning. I just used some $200 rear speakers and it sounded fine. In most movies those rear speakers will just be used for effects and music, in most 5.1 movies the majority of the sound comes from center channel (dialogue especially).

My friend has a 5.1 system with all old cerwin vega speakers (the big ones with the 15-inch bass driver) and it's really a killer system that you could probably put together for under $1000 USD if you bought them used.
 
Anyone have any recommendations for good floor-standing 2.0 hi-fi speakers, as well as a good amp that can be found used for cheap? (Adcom, maybe?)

I have setup a few pairs of B&W CM9's in client's houses and they are fucking phenominal. 2-channel systems can get ridiculous in price but those B&W's are like level 1-2 of audiophile stuff. Russound make a pretty decent 2-channel amps that aren't TOO bad. I mean, I don't know what's considered cheap for you but a pair of CM9's and a Russound amp capable of pushing the speakers would be about $3500 which is too rich for my blood.

My discount is pretty retarded on audio so I'm sure I could buy the pair for half of that almost but I don't really have that either with a baby coming.
 
5.1, without a shadow of a doubt. It's more expensive, yes, but you can hook it up to play 2.0 when you're listening to normal CDs and you can music and movies in 5.1. If you setup your surround system properly(this is important, otherwise just get 2.0) and listen to a good surround mix 5.1 shits all over 2.0. Porcupine Tree - Fear Of A Blank Planet is a good example of this, the surround version makes stereo sound obsolete.

I mean, I definitely thought the 5.1 of "Watershed" was better than the stereo but I attributed that more to the 24-bit v. 16-bit. Maybe it was a poor example but I thought Jens did a phenomenal job on the stereo mix so perhaps it wasn't a night and day comparison as the bar was already so high.
 
b_w_nautilus.jpg


Best looking speakers evar?
My dad's B&Ws sound fucking great, and I'm pretty sure they are entry level, so I'd imagine they all sound great.
I haven't listened to that many pairs though...